Edward Snowden: the whistleblower behind the NSA surveillance revelationsThe 29-year-old source behind the biggest intelligence leak in the NSA's history explains his motives, his uncertain future and why he never intended on hiding in the shadows

The individual responsible for one of the most significant leaks in US political history is Edward Snowden, a 29-year-old former technical assistant for the CIA and current employee of the defence contractor Booz Allen Hamilton. Snowden has been working at the National Security Agency for the last four years as an employee of various outside contractors, including Booz Allen and Dell.

The Guardian, after several days of interviews, is revealing his identity at his request. From the moment he decided to disclose numerous top-secret documents to the public, he was determined not to opt for the protection of anonymity. "I have no intention of hiding who I am because I know I have done nothing wrong," he said.

Snowden will go down in history as one of America's most consequential whistleblowers, alongside Daniel Ellsberg and Bradley Manning. He is responsible for handing over material from one of the world's most secretive organisations – the NSA.

In a note accompanying the first set of documents he provided, he wrote: "I understand that I will be made to suffer for my actions," but "I will be satisfied if the federation of secret law, unequal pardon and irresistible executive powers that rule the world that I love are revealed even for an instant."

Despite his determination to be publicly unveiled, he repeatedly insisted that he wants to avoid the media spotlight. "I don't want public attention because I don't want the story to be about me. I want it to be about what the US government is doing."

He does not fear the consequences of going public, he said, only that doing so will distract attention from the issues raised by his disclosures. "I know the media likes to personalise political debates, and I know the government will demonise me."

Despite these fears, he remained hopeful his outing will not divert attention from the substance of his disclosures. "I really want the focus to be on these documents and the debate which I hope this will trigger among citizens around the globe about what kind of world we want to live in." He added: "My sole motive is to inform the public as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them."

He has had "a very comfortable life" that included a salary of roughly $200,000, a girlfriend with whom he shared a home in Hawaii, a stable career, and a family he loves. "I'm willing to sacrifice all of that because I can't in good conscience allow the US government to destroy privacy, internet freedom and basic liberties for people around the world with this massive surveillance machine they're secretly building."

'I am not afraid, because this is the choice I've made'

Three weeks ago, Snowden made final preparations that resulted in last week's series of blockbuster news stories. At the NSA office in Hawaii where he was working, he copied the last set of documents he intended to disclose.

He then advised his NSA supervisor that he needed to be away from work for "a couple of weeks" in order to receive treatment for epilepsy, a condition he learned he suffers from after a series of seizures last year.

As he packed his bags, he told his girlfriend that he had to be away for a few weeks, though he said he was vague about the reason. "That is not an uncommon occurrence for someone who has spent the last decade working in the intelligence world."

On May 20, he boarded a flight to Hong Kong, where he has remained ever since. He chose the city because "they have a spirited commitment to free speech and the right of political dissent", and because he believed that it was one of the few places in the world that both could and would resist the dictates of the US government.

In the three weeks since he arrived, he has been ensconced in a hotel room. "I've left the room maybe a total of three times during my entire stay," he said. It is a plush hotel and, what with eating meals in his room too, he has run up big bills.

He is deeply worried about being spied on. He lines the door of his hotel room with pillows to prevent eavesdropping. He puts a large red hood over his head and laptop when entering his passwords to prevent any hidden cameras from detecting them.

Though that may sound like paranoia to some, Snowden has good reason for such fears. He worked in the US intelligence world for almost a decade. He knows that the biggest and most secretive surveillance organisation in America, the NSA, along with the most powerful government on the planet, is looking for him.

Since the disclosures began to emerge, he has watched television and monitored the internet, hearing all the threats and vows of prosecution emanating from Washington.

And he knows only too well the sophisticated technology available to them and how easy it will be for them to find him. The NSA police and other law enforcement officers have twice visited his home in Hawaii and already contacted his girlfriend, though he believes that may have been prompted by his absence from work, and not because of suspicions of any connection to the leaks.

"All my options are bad," he said. The US could begin extradition proceedings against him, a potentially problematic, lengthy and unpredictable course for Washington. Or the Chinese government might whisk him away for questioning, viewing him as a useful source of information. Or he might end up being grabbed and bundled into a plane bound for US territory.

"Yes, I could be rendered by the CIA. I could have people come after me. Or any of the third-party partners. They work closely with a number of other nations. Or they could pay off the Triads. Any of their agents or assets," he said.

"We have got a CIA station just up the road – the consulate here in Hong Kong – and I am sure they are going to be busy for the next week. And that is a concern I will live with for the rest of my life, however long that happens to be."

Having watched the Obama administration prosecute whistleblowers at a historically unprecedented rate, he fully expects the US government to attempt to use all its weight to punish him. "I am not afraid," he said calmly, "because this is the choice I've made."

He predicts the government will launch an investigation and "say I have broken the Espionage Act and helped our enemies, but that can be used against anyone who points out how massive and invasive the system has become".

The only time he became emotional during the many hours of interviews was when he pondered the impact his choices would have on his family, many of whom work for the US government. "The only thing I fear is the harmful effects on my family, who I won't be able to help any more. That's what keeps me up at night," he said, his eyes welling up with tears.

'You can't wait around for someone else to act'

Snowden did not always believe the US government posed a threat to his political values. He was brought up originally in Elizabeth City, North Carolina. His family moved later to Maryland, near the NSA headquarters in Fort Meade.

By his own admission, he was not a stellar student. In order to get the credits necessary to obtain a high school diploma, he attended a community college in Maryland, studying computing, but never completed the coursework. (He later obtained his GED.)

In 2003, he enlisted in the US army and began a training program to join the Special Forces. Invoking the same principles that he now cites to justify his leaks, he said: "I wanted to fight in the Iraq war because I felt like I had an obligation as a human being to help free people from oppression".

He recounted how his beliefs about the war's purpose were quickly dispelled. "Most of the people training us seemed pumped up about killing Arabs, not helping anyone," he said. After he broke both his legs in a training accident, he was discharged.

After that, he got his first job in an NSA facility, working as a security guard for one of the agency's covert facilities at the University of Maryland. From there, he went to the CIA, where he worked on IT security. His understanding of the internet and his talent for computer programming enabled him to rise fairly quickly for someone who lacked even a high school diploma.

By 2007, the CIA stationed him with diplomatic cover in Geneva, Switzerland. His responsibility for maintaining computer network security meant he had clearance to access a wide array of classified documents.

That access, along with the almost three years he spent around CIA officers, led him to begin seriously questioning the rightness of what he saw.

He described as formative an incident in which he claimed CIA operatives were attempting to recruit a Swiss banker to obtain secret banking information. Snowden said they achieved this by purposely getting the banker drunk and encouraging him to drive home in his car. When the banker was arrested for drunk driving, the undercover agent seeking to befriend him offered to help, and a bond was formed that led to successful recruitment.

"Much of what I saw in Geneva really disillusioned me about how my government functions and what its impact is in the world," he says. "I realised that I was part of something that was doing far more harm than good."

He said it was during his CIA stint in Geneva that he thought for the first time about exposing government secrets. But, at the time, he chose not to for two reasons.

First, he said: "Most of the secrets the CIA has are about people, not machines and systems, so I didn't feel comfortable with disclosures that I thought could endanger anyone". Secondly, the election of Barack Obama in 2008 gave him hope that there would be real reforms, rendering disclosures unnecessary.

He left the CIA in 2009 in order to take his first job working for a private contractor that assigned him to a functioning NSA facility, stationed on a military base in Japan. It was then, he said, that he "watched as Obama advanced the very policies that I thought would be reined in", and as a result, "I got hardened."

The primary lesson from this experience was that "you can't wait around for someone else to act. I had been looking for leaders, but I realised that leadership is about being the first to act."

Over the next three years, he learned just how all-consuming the NSA's surveillance activities were, claiming "they are intent on making every conversation and every form of behaviour in the world known to them".

He described how he once viewed the internet as "the most important invention in all of human history". As an adolescent, he spent days at a time "speaking to people with all sorts of views that I would never have encountered on my own".

But he believed that the value of the internet, along with basic privacy, is being rapidly destroyed by ubiquitous surveillance. "I don't see myself as a hero," he said, "because what I'm doing is self-interested: I don't want to live in a world where there's no privacy and therefore no room for intellectual exploration and creativity."

Once he reached the conclusion that the NSA's surveillance net would soon be irrevocable, he said it was just a matter of time before he chose to act. "What they're doing" poses "an existential threat to democracy", he said.

A matter of principle

As strong as those beliefs are, there still remains the question: why did he do it? Giving up his freedom and a privileged lifestyle? "There are more important things than money. If I were motivated by money, I could have sold these documents to any number of countries and gotten very rich."

For him, it is a matter of principle. "The government has granted itself power it is not entitled to. There is no public oversight. The result is people like myself have the latitude to go further than they are allowed to," he said.

His allegiance to internet freedom is reflected in the stickers on his laptop: "I support Online Rights: Electronic Frontier Foundation," reads one. Another hails the online organisation offering anonymity, the Tor Project.

Asked by reporters to establish his authenticity to ensure he is not some fantasist, he laid bare, without hesitation, his personal details, from his social security number to his CIA ID and his expired diplomatic passport. There is no shiftiness. Ask him about anything in his personal life and he will answer.

He is quiet, smart, easy-going and self-effacing. A master on computers, he seemed happiest when talking about the technical side of surveillance, at a level of detail comprehensible probably only to fellow communication specialists. But he showed intense passion when talking about the value of privacy and how he felt it was being steadily eroded by the behaviour of the intelligence services.

His manner was calm and relaxed but he has been understandably twitchy since he went into hiding, waiting for the knock on the hotel door. A fire alarm goes off. "That has not happened before," he said, betraying anxiety wondering if was real, a test or a CIA ploy to get him out onto the street.

Strewn about the side of his bed are his suitcase, a plate with the remains of room-service breakfast, and a copy of Angler, the biography of former vice-president Dick Cheney.

Ever since last week's news stories began to appear in the Guardian, Snowden has vigilantly watched TV and read the internet to see the effects of his choices. He seemed satisfied that the debate he longed to provoke was finally taking place.

He lay, propped up against pillows, watching CNN's Wolf Blitzer ask a discussion panel about government intrusion if they had any idea who the leaker was. From 8,000 miles away, the leaker looked on impassively, not even indulging in a wry smile.

Snowden said that he admires both Ellsberg and Manning, but argues that there is one important distinction between himself and the army private, whose trial coincidentally began the week Snowden's leaks began to make news.

"I carefully evaluated every single document I disclosed to ensure that each was legitimately in the public interest," he said. "There are all sorts of documents that would have made a big impact that I didn't turn over, because harming people isn't my goal. Transparency is."

He purposely chose, he said, to give the documents to journalists whose judgment he trusted about what should be public and what should remain concealed.

As for his future, he is vague. He hoped the publicity the leaks have generated will offer him some protection, making it "harder for them to get dirty".

He views his best hope as the possibility of asylum, with Iceland – with its reputation of a champion of internet freedom – at the top of his list. He knows that may prove a wish unfulfilled.

But after the intense political controversy he has already created with just the first week's haul of stories, "I feel satisfied that this was all worth it. I have no regrets."

we were talking about modern day heroes in another thread...add this guy to the list.

Wow...just wow.

_________________2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion

June 10th, 2013, 11:26 am

TheRealWags

Modmin Dude

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 amPosts: 12296

Re: Edward Snowden: whistleblower behind the NSA surveillanc

regularjoe12 wrote:

we were talking about modern day heroes in another thread...add this guy to the list.

Wow...just wow.

Agreed. I haven't watched the interview yet, but its on my list....hope to get to it today.I know there's a few peeps saying this isn't a big deal and that we've known this was going on for a while. Well, my response to that would be: 1. Many suspected this was going on, now we have confirmation. Huge difference IMO2. If it isn't a big deal, then why is the NSA, FBI & Govt in general working so hard to take Snowden down? Seems a bit inconsistent to me.

_________________

Quote:

Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....

June 10th, 2013, 11:50 am

regularjoe12

Off. Coordinator – Joe Lombardi

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 amPosts: 3987Location: Davison Mi

Re: Edward Snowden: whistleblower behind the NSA surveillanc

TheRealWags wrote:

regularjoe12 wrote:

we were talking about modern day heroes in another thread...add this guy to the list.

Wow...just wow.

Agreed. I haven't watched the interview yet, but its on my list....hope to get to it today.I know there's a few peeps saying this isn't a big deal and that we've known this was going on for a while. Well, my response to that would be: 1. Many suspected this was going on, now we have confirmation. Huge difference IMO2. If it isn't a big deal, then why is the NSA, FBI & Govt in general working so hard to take Snowden down? Seems a bit inconsistent to me.

That was me

Didn't mean to imply that it wasn't a big deal...just that im not suprised.

we know they can lsiten to cell phone calls, and we know google and other site flat out track everything we do...So it's just not suprising. It is REALLY disappointing to hear the headhunting going to happen to the "whistle blowers" though. Thats downright scary. Thats the part that really puts fear into the heart.

_________________2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion

June 10th, 2013, 1:14 pm

TheRealWags

Modmin Dude

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 amPosts: 12296

Re: Edward Snowden: whistleblower behind the NSA surveillanc

First off, it wasn't directed at anyone in particular, just that I've seen that sentiment on Twitter, Facebook, other forums, etc

regularjoe12 wrote:

we know they can lsiten to cell phone calls, and we know google and other site flat out track everything we do...So it's just not suprising.

Agreed, there are some of us that aren't surprised about it at all; at least now we can't be called conspiracy theorists on this topic now..so maybe that's a good thing?!?!? (looking for the silver lining)

regularjoe12 wrote:

It is REALLY disappointing to hear the headhunting going to happen to the "whistle blowers" though. Thats downright scary. Thats the part that really puts fear into the heart.

Agreed. In fact, I believe the Obama Admin has 'gone out of their way' to prosecute and persecute whistle-blowers. Ridiculous and maybe this & the Manning case will bring to light exactly what they've (the admin) has been up to in this regard.

I haven't posted here in awhile, but I'm laughing my buttcheeks off. I hate to say that I told ya so, but I told ya so. Obama consistently says one thing, yet does another. He was against the Patriot Act before he embraced, extended, and amplified it. This current fiasco is not what was intended and it's long past time to scale it back.

With that said, I have no problem with using PRISM or other techniques to catch terrorists, as long as each individual case is approved by a judge. However, spying upon ALL Americans without probable cause is unconstitutional via the 4th Amendment's ban against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Since Obama is prone to trampling upon OUR Constitutional rights, this shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Once a Marxist totalitarian, always a Marxist totalitarian. History shows that Stalin, Hitler, Mao, and Castro have done similar things, but those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Unfortunately, most Americans are too concerned about who is getting kicked off American Idol or Dancing with the Stars (Hi Steensn) to pay attention or care. As Ben Franklin once said, and I'm paraphrasing here, those who will sacrifice liberty for additional security, deserve neither.

_________________

June 10th, 2013, 8:53 pm

TheRealWags

Modmin Dude

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 amPosts: 12296

Re: Edward Snowden: whistleblower behind the NSA surveillanc

slybri19 wrote:

I haven't posted here in awhile, but I'm laughing my buttcheeks off. I hate to say that I told ya so, but I told ya so. Obama consistently says one thing, yet does another. He was against the Patriot Act before he embraced, extended, and amplified it. This current fiasco is not what was intended and it's long past time to scale it back.

With that said, I have no problem with using PRISM or other techniques to catch terrorists, as long as each individual case is approved by a judge. However, spying upon ALL Americans without probable cause is unconstitutional via the 4th Amendment's ban against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Since Obama is prone to trampling upon OUR Constitutional rights, this shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Once a Marxist totalitarian, always a Marxist totalitarian. History shows that Stalin, Hitler, Mao, and Castro have done similar things, but those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Unfortunately, most Americans are too concerned about who is getting kicked off American Idol or Dancing with the Stars (Hi Steensn) to pay attention or care. As Ben Franklin once said, and I'm paraphrasing here, those who will sacrifice liberty for additional security, deserve neither.

These programs have been around since the previous administration, why are you not also bashing Bush? Inconsistent much?

_________________

Quote:

Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....

June 11th, 2013, 10:11 am

TruckinMack

Lionbacker Rehab Guru

Joined: January 26th, 2006, 9:08 pmPosts: 1232

Re: Edward Snowden: whistleblower behind the NSA surveillanc

TheRealWags wrote:

These programs have been around since the previous administration, why are you not also bashing Bush? Inconsistent much?

I cannot speak for anyone else, but I've been unhappy with the Patriot Act since its inception. Whether Bush abused the act as much as Obama is irrelevant. That we have such an act is the antithesis of a country based on freedom and liberty. (Ditto with Obamacare.)

_________________Climate Change - happening every second, of every minute of every day ever since the world was created. Needless to say it's man's fault.

June 11th, 2013, 11:29 am

regularjoe12

Off. Coordinator – Joe Lombardi

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 amPosts: 3987Location: Davison Mi

Re: Edward Snowden: whistleblower behind the NSA surveillanc

TruckinMack wrote:

TheRealWags wrote:

These programs have been around since the previous administration, why are you not also bashing Bush? Inconsistent much?

I cannot speak for anyone else, but I've been unhappy with the Patriot Act since its inception. Whether Bush abused the act as much as Obama is irrelevant. That we have such an act is the antithesis of a country based on freedom and liberty. (Ditto with Obamacare.)

Aggreed. homeland security, the patriot act are both overreactions by our government that in the wrong hands could be very detrimental for the country. Obama definately has the wrong hands, but in no way should the Douche Baggery of the Bush Administration be overlooked.

These programs have been around since the previous administration, why are you not also bashing Bush? Inconsistent much?

That's such a typical reply from you Wags that I'm hesitant to dignify it with a response. However, since reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, I'll refer you to my previous post where I said, "This current fiasco is not what was intended and it's long past time to scale it back." What part of that do you not understand or comprehend? If Bush (whom you know I am not a huge fan of) had spied on ALL Americans, I would be just as critical since the US Constitution trumps politics in my book. With that said, it appears now that these policies began under Bush in either 2006 or 2007, but they were greatly expanded upon under Obama, so Bush deserves some of the blame as well.

But there is an even larger issue at play here. Back in 2010, during a speech to Latino voters, Obama said that we need to "punish our enemies". It has now become obvious that he is doing just that via the IRS harassment of Tea Party/conservative/religious groups and the DOJ investigations and surveillance of the AP and Rosen from Fox News. Would any sane individual on the planet TRUST someone capable of doing that with their phone/internet records? I would hope not. While Bush had many faults, I don't recall him using the power of the federal government against his political opponents like Obama has done. If Obama will use the IRS against his enemies, why would he have the moral/ethical character required to refrain from doing so with their phone/internet records? Remember, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Speaking of which, how can anyone say that this hasn't happened already? Remember General Petraeus? I know for a fact that the Obama regime was holding the affair over his head after the Benghazi debacle. That's why he backed down from criticizing the "talking points" regarding the Youtube video. It wasn't a coincidence that the affair became public and he resigned AFTER the election. Then there's Chief Justice John Roberts and the Obamacare decision, which he changed his opinion of between the actual hearing and the reading of the decision? Was he blackmailed or intimidated by the Obama regime to reverse his decision because of info they obtained through the NSA? I don't know, but after what we've learned over the past month or so, I think it's certainly possible.

_________________

June 11th, 2013, 6:28 pm

Blueskies

Player of the Year - Offense

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pmPosts: 2862

Re: Edward Snowden: whistleblower behind the NSA surveillanc

Sly posts a lot of crap here, but it is true. He's never been a Bush defender.

At this point, I just hope it will help Rand Paul get the White House in 2016.

One of my friends showed me this article, and these are the exact words he wrote about it:

Key Highlights:

Overall views on NSA surveillance haven't changed much from the Bush years to the Obama years, (2006 vs. 2013) with over 60% saying investigation of terrorist threats outweighs potential invasions of privacy.

However, digging into the numbers shows that the views of Republicans, Democrats and Independents have changed drastically since Obama took office. Basically, Democrats find it more acceptable under Obama (2006: 37% vs. 2013: 64%), and Republicans find it less acceptable (2006: 75% vs. 2013: 52%). Independents have also flipped from an unfavorable to favorable view (which would bring into question their "independence").

I'm not posting to debate anyone's view on this particular issue, but I will say that we need to stop being lemmings to the "D"s and "R"s that are constantly attached to political debate. Develop view points from the ground up, not the top down. The 7-year shift in the partisan breakout of this poll is driven by nothing other than who is in office, and that is scary.

Its not entirely our fault. Cable news and much of the mainstream media frame almost everything as a a conservative or liberal idea before actually reporting on it. They attempt to prop up, or discredit something with a label, before they even get into the meat of the topic. Next time you watch or read your news source du jour, pay attention to how they set up their segments or articles. Rarely are you given a chance to evaluate something before the "R" and "D" is attached. That initial framing can have a very powerful impact on our views. We should all be cynics in some regard, but its important to evaluate an argument based on its merits first. Then you can follow it to its source to add in some healthy cynicism.

On a side note, its very interesting (and not that shocking) how the latest NSA revelations have brought Democrat and Republican politicians together. While public opinion has shifted at a partisan level, our leaders start circling the wagons when something threatens their power.

I think he hit the nail right on the head.

_________________"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson

June 11th, 2013, 11:49 pm

TheRealWags

Modmin Dude

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 amPosts: 12296

Re: Edward Snowden: whistleblower behind the NSA surveillanc

slybri19 wrote:

TheRealWags wrote:

These programs have been around since the previous administration, why are you not also bashing Bush? Inconsistent much?

That's such a typical reply from you Wags that I'm hesitant to dignify it with a response. However, since reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, I'll refer you to my previous post where I said, "This current fiasco is not what was intended and it's long past time to scale it back." What part of that do you not understand or comprehend? If Bush (whom you know I am not a huge fan of) had spied on ALL Americans, I would be just as critical since the US Constitution trumps politics in my book. With that said, it appears now that these policies began under Bush in either 2006 or 2007, but they were greatly expanded upon under Obama, so Bush deserves some of the blame as well.

I'll choose to ignore your hyperbole & rant as that is obviously just who you are; can rarely get a straight answer from you as you just can't seem to insert platitudes and trollish behavior.

That being said, thank you for expanding on your OP.

For those that may have missed it, the point of my response is that there is no one person or 'side' that is responsible for this massive govt overreach and that we all need to remember/realize that when we're trying to point fingers.

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

Here's a link that I think is very illustrative of, well, the pathetic nature of news and politics in the US.

One of my friends showed me this article, and these are the exact words he wrote about it:

Key Highlights:

Overall views on NSA surveillance haven't changed much from the Bush years to the Obama years, (2006 vs. 2013) with over 60% saying investigation of terrorist threats outweighs potential invasions of privacy.

However, digging into the numbers shows that the views of Republicans, Democrats and Independents have changed drastically since Obama took office. Basically, Democrats find it more acceptable under Obama (2006: 37% vs. 2013: 64%), and Republicans find it less acceptable (2006: 75% vs. 2013: 52%). Independents have also flipped from an unfavorable to favorable view (which would bring into question their "independence").

I'm not posting to debate anyone's view on this particular issue, but I will say that we need to stop being lemmings to the "D"s and "R"s that are constantly attached to political debate. Develop view points from the ground up, not the top down. The 7-year shift in the partisan breakout of this poll is driven by nothing other than who is in office, and that is scary.

Its not entirely our fault. Cable news and much of the mainstream media frame almost everything as a a conservative or liberal idea before actually reporting on it. They attempt to prop up, or discredit something with a label, before they even get into the meat of the topic. Next time you watch or read your news source du jour, pay attention to how they set up their segments or articles. Rarely are you given a chance to evaluate something before the "R" and "D" is attached. That initial framing can have a very powerful impact on our views. We should all be cynics in some regard, but its important to evaluate an argument based on its merits first. Then you can follow it to its source to add in some healthy cynicism.

On a side note, its very interesting (and not that shocking) how the latest NSA revelations have brought Democrat and Republican politicians together. While public opinion has shifted at a partisan level, our leaders start circling the wagons when something threatens their power.

I think he hit the nail right on the head.

Agreed TDJ. IMO this is what hyper-partisanship gets us; "As long as 'my team' supports it, then so do I." and its utter and complete BS! The sooner that we all realize that the only real 'teams' are DC and us, the American citizen. D or R or I or whatever means nothing today. Remember our 'Coke vs Pepsi' discussions? Yup, this is yet more proof of that.

_________________

Quote:

Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....

June 12th, 2013, 9:35 am

regularjoe12

Off. Coordinator – Joe Lombardi

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 amPosts: 3987Location: Davison Mi

Re: Edward Snowden: whistleblower behind the NSA surveillanc

I think this whole scenario only further proves that there really is not difference between the Rep and the Dems (oh boy did i just open the door for hate!). they BOTH will do what they want, when they want, reguardless of what the people want/need. Neither side is looking out for my best interest and both seem to be furthering the same agenda....reguardless of the rhetoric they spew (either side).

EDIT: Thats not to say EACH PERSON in each party is like this, there are a few exceptions, but both parties as a whole are just different arms of the same monster....prolly the Flying Spagetti monster, which means this is all your fault Wags! I'll accept your apology now!

_________________2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion

June 12th, 2013, 12:23 pm

wjb21ndtown

Re: Edward Snowden: whistleblower behind the NSA surveillanc

My only point on R v D is taxation... Reps tax less and spend less, period. We would still have capital gains tax, a reduced rate estate tax, and no Obamacare if Romney was elected, period. You can't debate that. That's why I vote Rep., it's the least of two evils... or the best worst choice...